Bolitics The New Condem Government

[tonyh29]

Clarkson would be painting himself into a corner surely?

He would either have to maintain the blokey comedy infotainment act and have policies demanding kids smoke if drinking whilst driving over French prostitutes, a la UKIP. Or he'd have to go all reasonable, thus confusing and alienating his natural supporter base.

I think certain people would vote on the personality and unless he gets caught shagging an underage goat he'd got votes regardless

I like him as a tV personality , I wouldn't be keen on seeing him turning politics into a farce ( should that be more of a farce)... Even if it was at Ed's expense

[villaajax]

 

with ref to the 5p bag tax, don't panic!

it really isn't a big deal and is actually a bloody good idea that is very easy to adapt to. Though I note for some reason the english are being given at least 18 months warning to get used to the idea, not sure why? Oh, and deciding it will only be certain types of shops, that's a bizarre thing that can only lead to stupid headlines about two shops next to each other, one has to charge, one doesn't. Keep it simple, 5p per bag.

I thought supermarkets attempted to jump on this band wagon a few years back anyway ?

I remember my local Tesco removing plastic bags from the tills in a bed to encourage people to bring their own bags or pay 10p for a bag for life....

The policy lasted about a day before customer complaints ,moans or whatever meant they reversed the idea

 

Tories would probably stick to it though, not like them to do U turns on their policies.

[peterms]

Interesting piece on prospects for the election here.

 

Why a Tory majority is so unlikely

By John Rentoul

 

 

Here, again, is the terrific Chart of the Year produced by Electoral Calculus for Matthew Holehouse of the Telegraph. I posted it a few weeks ago, but I am reproducing it with the correct credits and with a new, improved commentary.

 

It packs more information into a few square inches – intelligibly, if you are familiar with the concepts, but even then you have to stare at it for about a week – than anything I’ve seen recently.

Each line shows the path of three-party support in the two years before the last seven elections.

 

The start of the line is what the opinion polls suggested two years before the election; the mid-point is one year before; and the blob with the date is the election result. All plotted on a three-party map, with the zones showing where the result produces a majority for each party, and the hung parliament territory in the middle, in which the line has landed only once, in 2010.

 

The simple message is that it shows that the Conservatives have further to go than ever before to win a majority in 2015.

 

This insight emerges by comparing the blue lines (when the Conservatives were in government) with the red lines (when Labour was in government). All the blue lines move in the Conservatives’ favour, whereas the red lines move, less consistently, in a Labour or Lib Dem direction. This supports the “mid-term protest” theory, that there tends to be a swing back to the government as an election approaches.

Finally, the chart shows where the 2015 path starts: the green dot, which I have superimposed (we know the date of the 2015 election, so May 2013 is the starting point).*

 

If the “mid-term protest” theory holds, and the government is regarded as essentially a Tory one, the line should move to the right and downwards, towards the zone marked Conservative Majority. But, as you can see, it has got further to go than before any other election that reached that destination.

 

And, fun though such historical comparisons are, they do not create iron laws. The mid-term protest theory is a tendency, not a certainty. What matters above all is politics: what leaders do and say, and how people respond.

 

*The average of the eight polls from different companies before 7 May 2013 was Con 29.5%, Lab 37.6%, Lib Dem 10%.

[jonno_2004]

The plastic bag tax in Wales makes shopping all the more interesting when I'm over there on training - the hunt for an empty cardboard box from the booze aisle to stuff an assortment of my own alcohol into makes it much more of a challenge.

[chrisp65]

I tend to stockpile plastic bags whilst in care free England, then subsidise my trip by selling them off once I'm back in Wales.

I stand outside Sainsbury and knock 'em out at 3p a pop.

 

Minted.

[Xann]

I tend to stockpile plastic bags whilst in care free England, then subsidise my trip by selling them off once I'm back in Wales.

I stand outside Sainsbury and knock 'em out at 3p a pop.

 

Minted.

 

Double your money with a pitch outside the glue shop.

[chrisp65]

a good friend of mine lost his job in the local department store for selling evostick and plastic bags to skinheads!

 

he was under the impression he was boosting sales figures and reducing street violence

 

the manager was under the he should leave and be a dealer elsewhere

 

he went on to realise the benefits of bulk buying industrial quantities of acetone

[peterms]

So, if you're a firm which is accused of defrauding the government in the performance of contracts, you can still bid for new contracts.

 

This seems slightly different to what normally happens, when if you are subject to a disciplinary inquiry you don't turn up for work, or if you are charged with raping seven people it is thought better if you don't continue as deputy speaker.

 

As far as firms go, they are routinely excluded from new work if for example they decline to cut their price part way through a previously awarded contract, or if the awarder of the contract thinks they can get a better deal elsewhere, or for whatever reason.

 

The award of government contracts is subject to many EU laws.  Do these laws really require us not to suspend companies from new bidding when they are under investigation for fraud in previous contracts?

 

I think we should be told.

[blandy]

They say when facing a decision you're not sure about, you should sleep on it.

Seems to work for Paddy Pantsdown.

 

 

 

Bad post, that. Same article, same content, different headline in later edition of paper. Now't to do with Paddy Pantsdown.

 

On the Clarkson/Doncaster  thing, I see Prescott suggested he should instead stand in Chipping Norton, where he lives, as he's got lots of friends there.

[tonyh29]

blandy, on 16 Sept 2013 - 1:26 PM, said:

 

 

On the Clarkson/Doncaster  thing, I see Prescott suggested he should instead stand in Chipping Norton, where he lives, as he's got lots of friends there.

 

 

 

yeah I saw that as well but didn't want to be the one to bring up Prescott's name

[blandy]

Someone egged me on to mention it, Tony.

[chrisp65]

good punch line

[tonyh29]

blandy, on 16 Sept 2013 - 3:44 PM, said:

Someone egged me on to mention it, Tony.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

[villaajax]

They say when facing a decision you're not sure about, you should sleep on it.

Seems to work for Paddy Pantsdown.

 

 

 

 

They don't call him Paddy Backdown for nothing.

[villaajax]

 

blandy, on 16 Sept 2013 - 1:26 PM, said:

 

 

On the Clarkson/Doncaster  thing, I see Prescott suggested he should instead stand in Chipping Norton, where he lives, as he's got lots of friends there.

 

 

 

yeah I saw that as well but didn't want to be the one to bring up Prescott's name

 

 

Why break the habit of a lifetime?

[peterms]

 

They say when facing a decision you're not sure about, you should sleep on it.

Seems to work for Paddy Pantsdown.

 

 

 

 

They don't call him Paddy Backdown for nothing.

 

 

It's not just him, though, they're all at it.

 

The annual conference denunciation of the tories, followed by another year of keeping them in power and meekly voting through everything they claim to be against.

 

Lots of shite about how green they are, then vote for fracking and nuclear.

 

Cable "letting it be known" all week that he's concerned about a house price bubble and (between the lines) wants a major change in econ policy, then crawls into the conference and votes for Clegg anyway.  I liked the WATO interview. when Kearney read back to him the embarrassingly misdirected e-mail instructing him and others what to say when interviewed; some arse had sent it to the press by mistake, but shouldn't be criticised for that, as it's about the same level of competence as the Libdems show in anything else.  Also liked when she put to him that his colleagues see a pattern of "will he, won't he" in his leaks and posturing, saying that he has "endless vanity".  How ironic to see him in the interview claiming that his and his party's continual treachery towards their own history, values, and members, is "grown up politics".  Smug, patronising, deceitful bollocks.

 

Oh, the whole lot of them, really.  An utter waste of space.

[PauloBarnesi]

Interesting piece on prospects for the election here.

 

Why a Tory majority is so unlikely

By John Rentoul

•  

 

 

Here, again, is the terrific Chart of the Year produced by Electoral Calculus for Matthew Holehouse of the Telegraph. I posted it a few weeks ago, but I am reproducing it with the correct credits and with a new, improved commentary.

 

It packs more information into a few square inches – intelligibly, if you are familiar with the concepts, but even then you have to stare at it for about a week – than anything I’ve seen recently.

Each line shows the path of three-party support in the two years before the last seven elections.

 

The start of the line is what the opinion polls suggested two years before the election; the mid-point is one year before; and the blob with the date is the election result. All plotted on a three-party map, with the zones showing where the result produces a majority for each party, and the hung parliament territory in the middle, in which the line has landed only once, in 2010.

 

The simple message is that it shows that the Conservatives have further to go than ever before to win a majority in 2015.

 

This insight emerges by comparing the blue lines (when the Conservatives were in government) with the red lines (when Labour was in government). All the blue lines move in the Conservatives’ favour, whereas the red lines move, less consistently, in a Labour or Lib Dem direction. This supports the “mid-term protest” theory, that there tends to be a swing back to the government as an election approaches.

Finally, the chart shows where the 2015 path starts: the green dot, which I have superimposed (we know the date of the 2015 election, so May 2013 is the starting point).*

 

If the “mid-term protest” theory holds, and the government is regarded as essentially a Tory one, the line should move to the right and downwards, towards the zone marked Conservative Majority. But, as you can see, it has got further to go than before any other election that reached that destination.

 

And, fun though such historical comparisons are, they do not create iron laws. The mid-term protest theory is a tendency, not a certainty. What matters above all is politics: what leaders do and say, and how people respond.

 

*The average of the eight polls from different companies before 7 May 2013 was Con 29.5%, Lab 37.6%, Lib Dem 10%.

 

 

The point of graphics is to be clear and easy to understand. That graphic is baffling...

[peterms]

The point of graphics is to be clear and easy to understand. That graphic is baffling...

I'd say the point of graphics is to get information across in a non-verbal way, to promote understanding in ways that words won't always manage.

 

If you saw the recent graphic on why banks failed, below, that's not immediately easy to understand, but it's a great graphic, which adds to understanding in a way that words alone can't.

 

On the electoral chances one, you won't understand it without reading the explanation, and if you try to, you will be baffled.  After reading the explanation  and understanding what it's trying to convey, I think many people would find it adds something, specifically the idea of distance to travel in vote swing set against time.  It's that particular insight which suggests the conclusion; a conclusion you won't draw from reading monthly percentage leads in the polls.

 

But that's not a new thing, graphics having to be explained.  I remember being told at age 8 or something that all maps had to have a key, to explain the symbols that were being used.  Seems reasonable.

 

[snowychap]

M&A?

Edit: D'oh. Mergers and Acquisitions, I guess?

Edited September 16, 2013 by snowychap